Red Meat Kills?

Eating red meat is associated with a sharply increased risk of death from cancer and heart disease, according to a new study, and the more of it you eat, the greater the risk.

The analysis, published online Monday in Archives of Internal Medicine, used data from two studies that involved 121,342 men and women who filled out questionnaires about health and diet from 1980 through 2006. There were 23,926 deaths in the group, including 5,910 from cardiovascular disease and 9,464 from cancer.

People who ate more red meat were less physically active and more likely to smoke and had a higher body mass index, researchers found. Still, after controlling for those and other variables, they found that each daily increase of three ounces of red meat was associated with a 12 percent greater risk of dying over all, including a 16 percent greater risk of cardiovascular death and a 10 percent greater risk of cancer death.

The increased risks linked to processed meat, like bacon, were even greater: 20 percent over all, 21 percent for cardiovascular disease and 16 percent for cancer.

If people in the study had eaten half as much meat, the researchers estimated, deaths in the group would have declined 9.3 percent in men and 7.6 percent in women.

Previous studies have linked red meat consumption and mortality, but the new results suggest a surprisingly strong link.

“When you have these numbers in front of you, it’s pretty staggering,” said the study’s lead author, Dr. Frank B. Hu, a professor of medicine at Harvard.

A version of this article appeared in print on March 13, 2012, on page D6 of the New York edition with the headline: Risks: More Red Meat, More Mortality.

How many of those people smoked, drank, were overweight, had unhealthy lifestyles, etc? There's no "control" in that. Sure, someone that's a vegetarian might live longer on average because of statistics, but is that because of their diet or because people that actively choose that diet are (on average) more aware of their health in other aspects as well?

How many of those people smoked, drank, were overweight, had unhealthy lifestyles, etc? There's no "control" in that. Sure, someone that's a vegetarian might live longer on average because of statistics, but is that because of their diet or because people that actively choose that diet are (on average) more aware of their health in other aspects as well?

Guys at Predator Nutrition took time to analyze this study (you can find it on their blog, I couldn't find what is the policy here for posting external links and as domain gets starred out automatically, I assume it's not OK)

Highlights:

"This involved a 61 item food [biennial] questionnaire which asked participants their intake of different food and beverages in the previous year. Over the years the number of foods considered were increased so that eventually up to 166 items were on the questionnaire."

"Population Used – The sample was based overwhelmingly on white, health workers"

"red meat consumption showed an increased risk of ill health or death independent of exercise activity or body mass index, such that just by exercising and not being fat you cannot assume it protects you from the negative effects of red meat according to this study."

"The likely greater health risks associated with processed meats despite similar levels of saturated fat and iron levels was attributed to other components in processed meat, particularly sodium and nitrite levels, with sodium intake linked to elevated blood pressure and nitrite concentrations linked to insulin resistance and endothelial dysfunction."

"Until we see a study comparing different cuts of meat and red meat sourced via different sources (grass fed versus can fed for instance) it makes the findings of this study less applicable to those who consume healthier sources of red meat."

"It is hard to argue against the bad results found for processed meats, nor do they constitute a surprise. Having salty, fatty, and processed foods is a bad idea in general "

"Something to note in the study was that exercise patterns were measured based on self-reported hours of physical activity which, for all we know, could mean someone walking along at an easy stroll. "

"Given the fact the vast majority of people in this study would likely be consuming red meat with a high carbohydrate diet it does make the relevance of the results specific to that group. A low carbohydrate diet would be associated with greater ability to utilise the fats in red meat for fuel compared to high red meat consumption with a high carbohydrate diet. Until we see further research in this area, firm conclusions should be avoided."

"Even if we accept the data presented at face value it has to be stressed that correlation equal or equal causation so there is nothing in the study to show a correlation between higher red meat intake and negative health outcomes. "

"the raw data before any statistical manipulation shows that those consuming a moderate amount of red meat as opposed to those consuming the least show the best life expectancy. If we split red meat comsumption into five quintile, those in the third quintile show the best results. Those in the fourth and fifth quintiles showing increased risk of mortality are also the ones with the very poorers lifestyles. The fact that the raw data for deaths per quintile does not match the headlines clearly shows that the impact of lifestyle factors was poorly accounted for."

" they found that each daily increase of three ounces of red meat was associated with a 12 percent greater risk of dying over all"

What nonsense. Last time I checked, the risk of dying was 100%. How can that be increased?

Considering that everyone dies, and nearly everyone eats red meat, I can't see how it would actually be possible to determine a cause and effect relationship between eating red meat and dying. More bunk "science".